totifoto
Well-known
I´m thinking about getting the Mamiya 7 but the fact that they dont have a lens equivalent to a 50mm lens in the 35mm system. Only 39mm and then the next lens above that is 71mm equivalent.
I´m a 50mm kinda guy and shot with it about 80% of my shots.
I´have a big Hasselblad kit and I´m selling it so I can by my first Leica m and a 50mm lens but I also like to shoot medium format and wanted to get a medium format rangefinder to go with it. But there does not seem to be a medium format rangefinder that has a lens equivalent to the 50mm in the 35mm system.
Why dont the make one that is 50mm equivalent?
I´m a 50mm kinda guy and shot with it about 80% of my shots.
I´have a big Hasselblad kit and I´m selling it so I can by my first Leica m and a 50mm lens but I also like to shoot medium format and wanted to get a medium format rangefinder to go with it. But there does not seem to be a medium format rangefinder that has a lens equivalent to the 50mm in the 35mm system.
Why dont the make one that is 50mm equivalent?
Bob Michaels
nobody special
Could it be that people who step up to a Mamiya 7 realize that you can take a few steps forward or back, or slightly crop the neg, to accomplish the same thing with an indiscernible change in perspective?
totifoto
Well-known
Why do they make 65 and 80mm then, they are 32mm and 39mm equivalent to the 35 mm system. Not much of a difference there.
erikhaugsby
killer of threads
Why does Voigtlander make 35mm and 40mm lenses? Why do people debate over the differences between 24mm and 25mm lenses?
The simple fact is that different people have different preferences that are met by different (even if similar) lenses.
Al Kaplan
Veteran
The popularity of "ideal format" cameras peaked in the 1970's. They were much favored by wedding photographers, practical folks who really tried to get by with minimum equipment. Some would get a wide angle in addition to the standard lens, others a short tele such as a 135. Very often they'd have two bodies, a lens on each, but medium format kind of limits you as to what you can carry. Three cameras is too many.
Most of these shooters had recently been shooting with a one lens set-up on a 4x5 press camera, or getting by with the normal lens on a twin lens reflex. They all just learned to live with what they had.
Consider the aspect ratios of ideal format versus 35mm, though. If you cropped the 6x7 negative to the 2:3 aspect ratio of the 35mm frame that 39mm equivalent field of view would be about 45mm. Or just learn to live with it. You'll quickly make the adjustment. Many of us remember shooting with both a Leica or Nikon and a Rolleiflex or Hasselblad and we managed to get great pictures with both formats.
Most of these shooters had recently been shooting with a one lens set-up on a 4x5 press camera, or getting by with the normal lens on a twin lens reflex. They all just learned to live with what they had.
Consider the aspect ratios of ideal format versus 35mm, though. If you cropped the 6x7 negative to the 2:3 aspect ratio of the 35mm frame that 39mm equivalent field of view would be about 45mm. Or just learn to live with it. You'll quickly make the adjustment. Many of us remember shooting with both a Leica or Nikon and a Rolleiflex or Hasselblad and we managed to get great pictures with both formats.
Bob Michaels
nobody special
Erik: You and Totifoto raise some good questions. However I think it boils down to a basic matter of economics and competition.
I would guess that the CV 35 & 40mm lenses outsell the Mamiya 7 lenses by maybe 1,000 to 1. The CV production numbers make it possible for them to make both a 35mm and 40mm. Whether you need both is another question. But there is also that competitive factor with other lens makers. So making both is economically feasible. You just can't say that about the Mamiya 7 production numbers and cost per lens.
Now I just have the 80mm and 50mm for my Mamiya 7. I have never felt limited. But I will get a 65mm someday when one comes along as a real steal. It's not because I need something between the 80mm-50mm gap. It is because I am thinking that the 65mm will take the place of both the others. I did that carrying a 65mm for my Bronica SQA instead of the 50mm and 80mm and it worked for me. I also have the 110mm (incredibly sharp flat field macro) for my SQA but I very seldom use it because it is so similar to the others. But the Bronica SQA lenses are 1/8 the price of Mamiya 7 lenses.
I think Al Kaplan nailed it when he said that many come from the TLR or other background where you only had one lens and learned to use what you had.
Totifoto: there are many reasons to buy and many reasons not to buy a Mamiya 7. Everyone has their own reasons. It is just that I have never before heard anyone balk because they did not feel the 80mm was an adequate replacement for a 50mm lens in 35mm format.
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
If you like a 50mm lens equivalent, why not just keep the Hassie and use the 80mm; or perhaps the 100mm if you like to frame more tightly?
Al Kaplan
Veteran
There's really no practical reason to own every available focal length. Not that many years ago a photojournalist shooting 35mm might own a fast 50 for dismal light conditions, but mostly carried a pair of cameras with a 35 and either an 85 or a 90. 28 wasn't really that much wider for most folks to justfy the purchase. It started out as a holdover from the days when it was the widest lens available, the widest that the optical designers of the day could make with the glasses then available, before Leitz started marketing the 21mm Schneider Super-Angulon.
The 21 was another story, though. It WAS wider than a 35. If you have a 21 and a 35 why do you need a 28? The 135 was another "amateur" focal length, the longest that would couple to the rangefinder of someone's only camera body. The pros would stick a 180/2.8 on an SLR body, and they survived quite nicely with nothing filling the gap between 90 and 180.
Back when I was shooting Hasselblad I couldn't find a clean used 150. I got a 120 at a great price. It's just not a popular focal length. I also picked up a meter prism for a song. The meter was dead! I wasn't looking for a meter prism, just a prism, but why pay twice the money for one that was built without the meter? Why not a 120 instead of a 150? It worked just fine.
Now Leica has a new GAS scam going with the 75mm focal length. We never "needed" 75mm before. Leitz had briefly made a fast 73mm long before any of us were born. The old VIDOM adjustable viewfinder was marked for it. I don't think that the newer Imarect finder ever was. As long as GAS infected shooters believe that life isn't complete without the entire line-up: 15, 21, 28, 35, 50, 75, 90, 135, 180,200, 280, 400, 560 and 800mm Leica will make sure that they're in the catalog.
The 21 was another story, though. It WAS wider than a 35. If you have a 21 and a 35 why do you need a 28? The 135 was another "amateur" focal length, the longest that would couple to the rangefinder of someone's only camera body. The pros would stick a 180/2.8 on an SLR body, and they survived quite nicely with nothing filling the gap between 90 and 180.
Back when I was shooting Hasselblad I couldn't find a clean used 150. I got a 120 at a great price. It's just not a popular focal length. I also picked up a meter prism for a song. The meter was dead! I wasn't looking for a meter prism, just a prism, but why pay twice the money for one that was built without the meter? Why not a 120 instead of a 150? It worked just fine.
Now Leica has a new GAS scam going with the 75mm focal length. We never "needed" 75mm before. Leitz had briefly made a fast 73mm long before any of us were born. The old VIDOM adjustable viewfinder was marked for it. I don't think that the newer Imarect finder ever was. As long as GAS infected shooters believe that life isn't complete without the entire line-up: 15, 21, 28, 35, 50, 75, 90, 135, 180,200, 280, 400, 560 and 800mm Leica will make sure that they're in the catalog.
Last edited:
oftheherd
Veteran
Where do the 100mm lenses by older 6x7 formats fit in this? Mamiya Universal/Press23, as well I think as Plaubel and others used to have 100mm lenses as "standard" did they not?
jbh
Member
Al, I think you nailed it. If the work couldn't be done with a 21, 35, 90 and 180 it was because the photographer wasn't trying hard enough.
To answer the specific question, probably the reason Mamiya didn't offer that length (and others) was due to lack of demand and an increasingly-cluttered viewfinder. They do have _lots_ of experience in medium format and what's desired in medium format.
I'll forgive them for not mounting a 38 Biogon for the Mamiya 6. <g>
To answer the specific question, probably the reason Mamiya didn't offer that length (and others) was due to lack of demand and an increasingly-cluttered viewfinder. They do have _lots_ of experience in medium format and what's desired in medium format.
I'll forgive them for not mounting a 38 Biogon for the Mamiya 6. <g>
And Pentax 6x7/67/67II has "normal" covered with both a compact 90/2.8 and a slightly faster 105/2.4. Go figure; I prefer the 75/2.8 as "normal"!
The Mamiya with 80mm would be great...Debusti Paolo
Well-known
hi did you consider a bronica rf645 with 65mm lens?
TJV
Well-known
I'm probably the only person in history liking a 35mm kit consisting of 28, 35 and 50mm lenses. I don't go for longer - toyed with a 90mm which I never took to - and I've never ever considered a wider lens to be necessary for the work I do. For my Mamiya 7ii kit I use the 65mm lens most but the 80mm lens is very close behind. I've always like the 50mm focal length best on a Leica and the 80mm on the Mamiya, considering the shorter width of the frame, pretty much feels exactly the same coverage when out shooting. I get as close to people as I could when using my Leica 50mm's and frame very similarly.
The only lenses I feel I'd like to try are a 21mm for my Leica and a 50mm for the Mamiya 7ii. Both would be great for street and interiors.
The only lenses I feel I'd like to try are a 21mm for my Leica and a 50mm for the Mamiya 7ii. Both would be great for street and interiors.
Gary Miller
Newbie
Alfred Eisenstadt once said that he probably shot 90% of his LIFE photos with either the 35 or the 90. When I was shooting annual reports I did most of my work with the 24 and the 105. Each person will fall into a rhythm with almost any combo.
oftheherd
Veteran
And Pentax 6x7/67/67II has "normal" covered with both a compact 90/2.8 and a slightly faster 105/2.4. Go figure; I prefer the 75/2.8 as "normal"!
The original Press 23 had a 90mm as the normal. I have always thought the 100mm was closer to "normal," even though the diagonal is closer to 93mm. Just what I got used to I guess, since I started out with the Super Press 23.
Turtle
Veteran
This is the same as the 80mm on the Mamiya 7 - almost exactly. Both are somewhere between 35mm equivalent and 50 standard, but with differing aspect ratios absolute comparison is not that useful.
50mm is pretty arbitrary on 35mm in that 40 or 60mm can be just as useful, just depends on your preferences. The Mamiya's 80 is spectacular and you are still left with a 645 neg if you make the 80mm a standard lens if you follow me. These lenses are so sharp, that is no need to be concerned! I also am very, very glad the 65 and 80 both exist as they are very different lenses in use. I use the 65 about 80% of the time.
There are very, very few lenses that perform like the Mamiya's 80mm, so you can crop down to 35mm if you like and you will still have a darned sharp negative left! Left uncropped you have a nice mild wide - very useful!
waileong
Well-known
Maybe because they don't have enough space in the finder for another set of framelines?
Zenjitsuman
Established
Filling the Gap.
Filling the Gap.
If I were to get the Mamiya 7 I would go for the 50mm (25mm fov) and the 80mm (39mm fov). The 50 is a Biogon like formula and is about as wide as you need to do landscapes. The 80mm has just as big a reprodution as the 150mm and is easy to focus.
I have two Pentax 67 bodies and the 55mm and 150mm lenses and don't think I need to fill the gap and haul another lens around.
Filling the Gap.
If I were to get the Mamiya 7 I would go for the 50mm (25mm fov) and the 80mm (39mm fov). The 50 is a Biogon like formula and is about as wide as you need to do landscapes. The 80mm has just as big a reprodution as the 150mm and is easy to focus.
I have two Pentax 67 bodies and the 55mm and 150mm lenses and don't think I need to fill the gap and haul another lens around.